Leronlimab Biologics Sequence Review Report 2026: CCR5 Similarity and Patent-Risk Signals
This Leronlimab Biologics Sequence Review Report was produced with PatSnap Biology Modality MCP workflows. It connects patent-scale similarity search, sequence retrieval, pairwise alignment and antibody–antigen evidence in a reproducible screen. Explore the PatSnap MCP servers used in this report.
Review date: 22 July 2026. This report supports R&D and IP triage; it is not a legal opinion, freedom-to-operate conclusion or validity analysis. A sequence hit does not establish infringement. “Claimed” is a database annotation that still requires family consolidation, live-claim review and jurisdiction-specific claim construction.
Executive sequence-risk thesis
Leronlimab is an antibody directed to CCR5. Public therapeutic sequence data from Thera-SAbDab PL132, Oxford Protein Informatics Group supplied the query material: VH 122 aa, VL 112 aa. PatSnap’s all-patent protein search returned a closest review hit at 100.00% query identity across 122/122; the returned record was marked No.
The screening conclusion is moderate-to-elevated diligence priority, not “blocked” or “clear.” Similarity is most informative when interpreted by chain, CDR/framework location, construct architecture, target evidence and the language of live claims. Constant-region reuse or a common light chain can produce high percentages without proving asset-level collision, while a small number of substitutions in a CDR or linker junction can be disproportionately important.
Sequence scope and MCP workflow
The review began with traceable Thera-SAbDab PL132, Oxford Protein Informatics Group query sequences. Each available VH, VL and secondary arm was submitted with ls_sequence_search_submit against ALLPATENT protein records, using gaps, E-value ≤1×10−5, identity 70–100%, query coverage 80–100% and a 500-record task cap. Results were retrieved with ls_sequence_search_get_results; the closest informative hit was resolved with ls_sequence_fetch and compared using ls_sequence_alignment. ls_patent_sequence_fetch and ls_antibody_antigen_search supplied patent and target context.
Similarity search readout
| Query | Search volume | Leading evidence |
|---|---|---|
| VH (122 aa) | 500 returned records | 100.00% identity; 122/122; claimed: No |
| VL (112 aa) | 500 returned records | 100.00% identity; 112/112; claimed: Yes |
The largest chain-level result set contained 500 records. These are search records, not unique inventions, enforceable claims or independent families. Publications can repeat the same sequence across jurisdictions, examples, comparators and continuations. Deduplication by earliest priority, applicant, simple family and legal status is required before business conclusions.
Module-level reading of the construct
The available query set contains 2 independently searchable chain module(s). For this single-pair format, heavy- and light-variable evidence should still be interpreted together. A highly conserved light chain can be shared across unrelated heavy chains, while a heavy-chain match may include common framework and constant-region sequence outside the specificity-defining CDRs.
The chain totals also provide a practical specificity check. A chain that repeatedly reaches the task cap is less discriminating at the raw-sequence level than a chain with a smaller, concentrated result set. Reviewers should therefore prioritize the rarest domain or junction, then use the more widely reused chain as corroboration. This ordering reduces the risk of treating platform-level or germline similarity as evidence of an asset-level collision.
Pairwise alignment: what the closest hit means
The selected VH comparison reported 122/122 identical positions, query coverage 122/122, E-value 1.87319e-86 and 0/122 gaps. The matched subject sequence was resolved as sequence 611647123, 350 aa, annotated “unnamed sequence”.
Percentage identity alone is not a claim chart. The next review should map every mismatch to IMGT/Kabat position, CDR or framework, constant region, linker boundary and any claimed SEQ ID. For multispecific assets, each arm should also be searched independently because a full-construct query can obscure highly conserved binding modules.
Antibody–antigen and patent-sequence evidence
The antibody–antigen search returned 196 records after filtering for Leronlimab in the CCR5 context. The leading record was WO2025250666A1, “Methods of treating cancer and inflammation-related diseases with leronlimab”, annotated with leronlimab (PRO#1 VH).
The direct patent record WO2025250666A1 returned 12 associated sequences. This is useful traceability evidence, but the sequence list can include examples, controls, fragments and repeated disclosures.
Evidence strength and blind spots
The evidence is strongest for the exact query sequences, the returned alignment coordinates and the patent records directly resolved by the MCP tools. It is weaker where therapeutic aliases are absent, where a publication supplies fragments instead of the administered construct, or where the result set is capped before all lower-ranked families are reviewed. Antibody names can also refer to a parental molecule, biosimilar, anti-drug antibody or comparator; the underlying sequence and target annotation must be read before attributing a record to Leronlimab.
Patent sequence listings are deliberately broad and can contain screening libraries, consensus sequences, controls, antigens, primers and manufacturing elements alongside candidate therapeutics. Conversely, relevant claims may define a molecule through CDR combinations, percentage-identity thresholds, functional binding language or genus formulas without reproducing the exact commercial sequence. This is why the report combines sequence similarity with antibody–antigen evidence and still stops short of a legal conclusion.
Patent-risk interpretation
| Dimension | Screening signal | Required next check |
|---|---|---|
| Sequence proximity | 100.00% closest reviewed identity | Consolidate families and map mismatches by domain. |
| Claim annotation | No | Read live independent and dependent claims in relevant jurisdictions. |
| Target evidence | 196 direct filtered records | Search aliases, development codes and each target separately. |
| Legal conclusion | Not determined | Assess priority, ownership, licensing, prosecution, validity and territorial status with counsel. |
Diligence actions
- Confirm that the reviewed sequence matches the clinical or commercial construct rather than an early lead or analytical reference.
- Repeat searches for CDR-only queries, junctions and nucleotide sequences, then cluster records by patent family.
- Annotate each high-identity hit by VH/VL domain, CDR, framework, Fc and linker position.
- Retrieve the underlying sequence listing and verify the returned sequence number and “claimed” annotation against the filed document.
- Build jurisdiction-specific claim charts for live families and document licenses or platform rights affecting CCR5 programs.
- Rerun the MCP workflow at the transaction or development decision date because sequence and legal-status coverage changes.
Bottom line
Leronlimab has a traceable therapeutic sequence and measurable proximity to patent-disclosed protein records. The combination of 100.00% closest-hit identity, No claim annotation, 196 filtered antibody–antigen records and 12 directly fetched patent sequences supports moderate-to-elevated diligence priority. The defensible outcome is a prioritized, domain-aware family and claim review—not a binary clearance statement.
Sources and methodology notes
Query sequences: Thera-SAbDab PL132, Oxford Protein Informatics Group. Core similarity, sequence, alignment, patent-sequence and antibody–antigen evidence was retrieved through PatSnap Biology Modality MCP on 22 July 2026. Database annotations and legal status can change; rerun at the decision date.
